David Vigorito has written to me with his thoughts, and (amongst other things) he says:

Quote:

I did a search B60-B99 with at least one player 2500, and there were 2000 or so games (this is from mid-October 2018, by the way). About 12% (230 games) of those are B70-79. So if we added Sveshnikov and 2...e6 stuff, I imagine the real Dragon percentage of all open Sicilians is something like 3-4%! Maybe with the Accelerated that goes to 5-6%. By comparison, a full half (1000+) are B90-99!

I'm going to start a thread in the ChessPublishing section about a possible reorganisation.

I wondered about Dragon too, as a6-d6 sicilians are played 10x more often. I think they made the sections long time ago and that they should reconsider the construction.

That said, I have heard people say that the one that runs (or maybe even owns) this site is really, really, REALLY against change.

I've never seen anyone on this forum make that comment before.

I've also seen Tony offer to re-organise sections before (I think when there was a briefing discussion in the Nimzo thread over why the Benoni is there rather than in another section), so i know it isnt true.

The real difficulty for the site is finding a different mix that most people are happy with. Personally, i think that having Chris Ward do a section specifically on the Dragon is quite good. I appreciate others might not agree.

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.

IP Logged

MNb

YaBB Moderator
Offline

Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10355
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender:

Re: Should the Dragon have its own section?Reply #14 - 08/11/19 at 16:29:59

I agree it doesn't feel intensly logical to single out the Dragon and Accelerated Dragon for a separate section when other Sicilians get clumped in one. If it is popular and gets subscriptions I still suggest keeping it though.

If you are thinking about splitting the Open Sicilian section. Maybe disgruntled subcribers can be offered to switch sections? And if they feel the subscription offers less value after the split, maybe get some kind of bonus subscription for one more section.

Regards./ CbT

IP Logged

GMTonyKosten

YaBB AdministratorOffline

Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3046
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender:

Re: Should the Dragon have its own section?Reply #12 - 08/11/19 at 12:53:04

I suppose the orignal site layout was aimed at appearing as interesting as possible to attract as many subscribers as possible. However, opening theory progresses, openings that were popular become backwaters and openings that were almost unknown in 1999 are now the height of theory.I am happy to consider alternatives - it is possible to change the layout, of course, and it is even possible to add more sections, theoretically.However, assuming there was a consensus on how to divide the different openings one potential problem would be how to deal with subscribers who no longer had access to the openings they subscribed to? For example, if I put the Sveshnikov in with the Dragon I will surely get complaints from all the Sveshnikov fans who subscribed to the Open Sicilians section.

This sounds like a very biased statement by a Dragon advocate. I am a huge advocate of the French, but am I stupid enough to say that the French is more popular than the Sicilian? Absolutely not!

With the Sicilian, the Dragon is not the most popular, and does not deserve it's own section. Many lines are already figured out to a draw! It's a dead opening, just like how Latin is a dead language! Face it! It's a draw! At the GM Level, you've got a better chance winning with the Najdorf, French, Caro-Kann, or even 1...e5, than you do with the Dragon.

Please watch your language!Do you need to call me stupid on account of something I never even said?

I just said that the Dragon has many supporters, even people who do not play it themselves.

Tony just confirmed me by saying that it sells well.

Of course I do not disagree that Najdorf is played way more often, a quick search in Mega 2019 revealed the following:

And please do not forget that there is still the Accelerated Dragon included in this section, which is difficult to count because of many move orders, but 2. ... Nc6 3.d4 cd4: 4.Nd4: g6 alone has more than 50.000 games!

Withholding these points, the Dragon is a very special variation with its own flair, and that is a valid reason for it to have its own section in my view.

Your statements on the Dragon just reveal you do not know a lot about it or chess in general.Perhaps you should subscibe to the section?!

IP Logged

GMTonyKosten

YaBB AdministratorOffline

Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3046
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender:

Re: Should the Dragon have its own section?Reply #9 - 08/08/19 at 15:16:28

It looks like this thread is veering off course, I might splice the Dragon ones into the appropriate section unless anyone objects?A very long time ago I did ask Chris to take on the Kan/Paulsen Sicilians as well ... but he refused! I agree that the way the openings are divided is not the most logical, I suppose the original owner had his reasons. Incidentally, the Dragon section actually sells quite well The good news is that I have finally returned home (despite easyJet trying their best to maroon me elsewhere!) and hope to have almost all the outstanding updates online over the next day or two.

With the Sicilian, the Dragon is not the most popular, and does not deserve it's own section. Many lines are already figured out to a draw! It's a dead opening, just like how Latin is a dead language! Face it! It's a draw!

If the Dragon is a known draw, why aren't they playing it all the time with Black in the super tournaments? Or, to turn the board around, why are some top players still playing the Open Sicilian against 2...d6?

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson

IP Logged

Jupp53

God Member
Offline

be

Posts: 851
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender:

Re: Should the Dragon have its own section?Reply #7 - 08/08/19 at 00:15:53

That said, I have heard people say that the one that runs (or maybe even owns) this site is really, really, REALLY against change. Not sure which is in more need of change - this site, or the electoral system in the United States!

You h e a r d? P e o p l e?

I read someone trolling. Say which changes do you want or stop ranting.

Btw - chess openings still are the same. Lines have changed.

« Last Edit: 08/08/19 at 06:15:53 by Jupp53 »

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.Dum spiro spero.

IP Logged

FrenchRefutes1e4

YaBB Newbies
Offline

I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 16
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender:

Re: Should the Dragon have its own section?Reply #6 - 08/08/19 at 00:08:56

I wondered about Dragon too, as a6-d6 sicilians are played 10x more often. I think they made the sections long time ago and that they should reconsider the construction.

I can tell you that these exact same sections existed in 1999. Not sure if the site existed before then. All that has changed is the people that write for it, like back in the day, Neil McDonald wrote the French section, Paul Motwani wrote the double King Pawn section, etc. I could be wrong, but I believe the Dragon, Nimzo/Benoni, and Daring Defenses are the only sections still written by the original authors.

That said, I have heard people say that the one that runs (or maybe even owns) this site is really, really, REALLY against change. Not sure which is in more need of change - this site, or the electoral system in the United States!

IP Logged

FrenchRefutes1e4

YaBB Newbies
Offline

I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 16
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender:

Re: Should the Dragon have its own section?Reply #5 - 08/08/19 at 00:04:12

While I agree that the Dragon section offers less value than other sections (only 6 games instead of 8-10 and to be honest there are sometimes fillers), I would definitely like to see the section continue!The Dragon is a very special opening and there are many supporters of this line, even people who do not play it themselves.

This sounds like a very biased statement by a Dragon advocate. I am a huge advocate of the French, but am I stupid enough to say that the French is more popular than the Sicilian? Absolutely not!

With the Sicilian, the Dragon is not the most popular, and does not deserve it's own section. Many lines are already figured out to a draw! It's a dead opening, just like how Latin is a dead language! Face it! It's a draw! At the GM Level, you've got a better chance winning with the Najdorf, French, Caro-Kann, or even 1...e5, than you do with the Dragon.